FOCrR B'IGCKERr)erelopmental malformatioiis a i d monstrosities remain sourccs of ncrew-failing interest. R y the ancients they ~e i * c 1 eyed as products of the supcmiatural; to the naive mind of yesterday they gave full scope to all sorts of sinistcr speculations, arid t o the biologist of to-day they shed light into the hidden factors ant1 laws of genesis and growth. That emhryologival freaks contributcd their part in peopling the realm of mythology with fanciful creatures is evident ; quit(. as intelligilde that the Western mind of the misnamed Dark Age, hcmmctl i i i by the ~i a r r o w horizoiis of a nascent culture, should openly or surreptitiously accuse tlie woman who was iiiifortmiate enough to give hirth to a misshapen child of Iiariiig lwei1 visited hy an iiicul.)us. When hcr fruit assumed t lie deformity here pictured ( fig. 1), what was i i e a n r than to iiisiliiiatc shc had llt too familiar with a merman, or, wheii gossip a i i t l superst ition hecamc lcss malevolent, to sap that a triton had friglitened her iii her tlrcams ! ('oiisideriiig the impressioii which the sireiiomclian monster would makc. on the popular mind, it is strange that Aristotlc ( l o w I i o t list it iii liis fairly cxteiisive catalogne of monsti'osities givcii in his treatise " 0 1 i the generation of animals. ' ' This iii(1icates its relative infrequeiicy. The credulous and \.olul)le I'liny, on tlie other hiiiid, repeats tlie sailors ' ?-ar11 that somc~whci~c iiear 11 lalid of tlie troglodyt cs tliclrv > O N SIKEN1FOF;XI MONSTEHS 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 ON SIRENIFORM MONSTERS